Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Mahabeer v. Jamuna Prasad And Others - WRIT - C No. 15926 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 6447 (23 March 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 23

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15926 of 2006

Mahabeer Vs. Jamuna Prasad & others

Hon'ble Umeshwar Pandey, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner-plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction in which he moved an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 C.P.C. for grant of interim injunction. The application was allowed by the trial court but on appeal the appellate court has allowed it and set aside the order of the trial court and the application for temporary injunction was also rejected.

Learned counsel contends that the trial court, after considering the entire material available with regard to petitioner's title over the property in question, has found a very strong case in his favour for grant of interim injunction. The appellate court without any justifiable reason has rejected the interim injunction.

A perusal of the impugned order passed by the appellate court shows that the plaintiff-petitioner, as per his own case taken in the pleadings, has stated that the land in suit is in shape of 'Khandhar'  and he  has constructed his house somewhere at Bhateeli Road. Obviously, these pleadings of the petitioner go to speak a long way against him. He is claiming his possession but is not residing over this land. His residential house is away from this place. The appellate court has also observed that even though, the defendants might not be having a prima facie case in their  favour but that will not entitle the petitioner-plaintiff for grant of temporary injunction. In all these views of the matter that the appeal has been allowed and the order of the trial court has been set aside, I do not find any justifiable cause in a writ jurisdiction before this court to disturb the order of the appellate court and as such, the petition having no force is hereby dismissed.

It is however observed that the trial court will take up the hearing of the suit in right earnest and dispose it of at the earliest, preferably within a year.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.